Get Schooled

By Tell the truth Alvin

December 18, 2008 8:58 AM | Link to this

If it’s been three years, and you still haven’t asked for public input, you really never wanted it in the first place.

You can’t call people stakeholders and then not give them a stake in the process.

It’s no different than a developer going behind the back of a neighborhood, getting a private sewage treatment plant approved in the middle of a subdivsion, and then claiming it’s ok because they’ll have input in the implementation process. And it stinks just as much.

And please, any and all groups that are opposing it, please feel free to use that analogy as you educate the public about this.

By Tony

December 18, 2008 9:20 AM | Link to this

While this plan may have good components, I cannot believe the attitude reflected during the meetings by the board of education. Last week’s quote by one board member has stuck. “This is not a question and answer session.” The arrogance of this attitude when making decisions about the most important service provided by our governemnt is appalling. For this alone, the citizens of Gwinnett should completely overhaul their board of education.

The true power of flexibility will come at the school level. With that idea, the leaders are on target. Developing school based plans for improvement are the best and most successful way of reforming schools and improving student achievement. The number of onerous rules imposed on public schools stifles the creativity of local leaders to try new strategies. For instance, if I wanted to have a period in the day where every certified person in the building had a reading group, I would not be allowed to use the PE teacher, Art teacher, Music teacher, counselors or media specialists because they do not have the proper certification. If I had a little flexibility with that rule, I could have many small groups and we could utilize all our resources to help improve reading skills.

Unfortunately, by excluding the most important stakeholders - teachers and parents - from the planning of Gwinnett’s application I think the plan should be scrapped and the board should start over.

By V for Vendetta

December 18, 2008 10:40 AM | Link to this

This process disgusts me. There is simply no other way to put it. What Wilbanks and the BOE has done in Gwinnett is nothing short of criminal. As Tony said, there are some positives to be taken away from this decision, but the attitude with which this plan has been approved is nothing short of reprehensible.

I’ve said this on numerous blogs, and I will say it once again for everyone’s benefit. If parents knew HALF of what takes place in Gwinnett Co. schools, whether it has to do with testing, discipline, or management, they would call for the immediate removal of the entire BOE. The sheer ignorance and indifference of the parents is astounding, as is the posturing and pretending they espouse so regularly on these forums and others.

I ask you again: What are YOU doing at the individual level to promote the wellfare of your system? What can be done to terminate the tyrannical hold that so many BOEs enjoy in their respective counties. How can we stop this? Who will speak up? Who will finally make a difference?

Who is John Galt?

By Clarence

December 18, 2008 11:08 AM | Link to this

Personally, I don’t know enough to have an opinion yet. In theory, I think flexability is good, but I agree with this from Tell the Truth Alvin completely: “If it’s been three years, and you still haven’t asked for public input, you really never wanted it in the first place.”

I’ve worked on projects like this (on a MUCH smaller scale), and they are never successful without buy-in and ownership from ALL stakeholders. I think Gwinnett made a big mistake here.

By steve

December 18, 2008 12:29 PM | Link to this

I think asking for public information isn’t always the best practice - IF you want to get something done. I think the superintendent has the point that when the public input should be most necessary and beneficial is at each school level - when a school wants to use the available flexibility. At this stage, it seems like the only thing they did was to define the areas in which schools will have flexibility. Given the board members are elected, they are just as smart (or dumb) as those who elect them. If you ask for public inputs, what matters is who is loudest, specially in the issues that are emotionally charged such as teacher pay and class size. However, it makes no sense to put an arbitrary limit on those items. Some classes can be taught effectively with as many as 35 or even 40 students. By having some large class, we could create some smaller classes without having to hire more teachers. Why not give schools an option of paying more to attract quality math or science teacher, or band director? Let the school teachers and parents make that decision, not at teh state level or even at the district level.

By Tony

December 18, 2008 1:41 PM | Link to this

The problem with your idea, steve, is that schools are not private corporations. They are run by elected officials who are responsible to work with the public. There are decisions that superintendents should be allowed to make, no question there. Unfortunately, in drafting this far-reaching plan most of the public has been excluded. Then when a public meeting was held, people were not allowed to ask questions and get answers. In fact, there has still not been a Q&A (as far as I can tell).

By steve

December 18, 2008 2:42 PM | Link to this

Does the law require Q&A sessions? Don’t we all have an access to board members we elect and ask them questions? [I guess a superintendent is hired by the board, not elected, correct?] If we don’t like the answer (or lack thereof), they will pay when they run for re-elections. If this idea has been out there for 3 years, then some of the board members must have been elected while this issue has been discussed. What did they say about this plan during the election? Did anyone ask?

I don’t think this plan by itself has no effect on public. It simply give the system flexibility - they may or may not chose to take advantage of the given flexibility. Until they decide to use the available flexibility, nothing changes, does it?

By Tony

December 18, 2008 5:07 PM | Link to this

No, the law does not require Q&A sessions. However, accrediting agencies require stakeholder INVOLVEMENT in school improvement planning. Stakeholders are usually understood to be parents, teachers, community members, school leaders, business leaders and government officials.

When the public was invited to the information session, there was a reasonable expectation on their behalf that questions should be answered. If the plan is going to help Gwinnett improve student achievement, there should be no hesitation in the least on their part to include everyone in the planning process. They should be very proud to be able to answer questions about the plan.

By hiding behind the veil of secrecy the plan becomes suspect from the outset. Remarks like the one quoted earlier solidify attitudes of distrust and lack of openness in the planning process. Why were the board members and leaders evading the questions during the forum last week? These actions speak loudly regarding trustworthiness.

The people of Gwinnett should not be fooled into thinking the plan will have no impact on the public as previously suggested. School improvement is a very real need in many areas and will have a profound effect. The results could very likely be positive. The problem in this instance is the shroud of secrecy and the lack of responsiveness on the part of leaders and the board.

By catlady

December 18, 2008 5:21 PM | Link to this

Steve: Power. That is what you are giving up. Or refusing to demand the power you should have.

The only way the Gwinnett BOE will take notice is if parents (those voting, educated, middle class parents) whose children stand to be sardined even more tightly into a room with the BD, sp ed, ESOL, and EIP kids and one teacher (or, better yet, an aide and a teacher on TV) immediately begin a phone calling, letter writing, picketing, holy h3ll raising campaign to put the Board members on notice that they will be out on their collective azzes if they don’t back off! Kind of like what it looked like Clayton Co did, except the parents cannot just come down and get on the six o’clock news and then go home, Gwinnett County parents have to show that they are in it for the LONG HAUL, and they won’t shut up until they are treated as full members of the community, instead of just the open wallet. And that they will REMOVE any board member that gets in their way by supporting this unbridled power grab. Now would be a good time to get rid of that supt., too, that the Board continues to support.

Just my opinion, however. Glad I don’t pay Gwinnett’s sky high property taxes.

By Lee

December 18, 2008 5:52 PM | Link to this

I agree with the first poster. The BOE does not want public input, they don’t care what the public has to say, and there is nothing anyone can do to make them change their minds at this point - and I say that with one caveat. If you could get several hundred parents to flood a board meeting, they might pay a little attention.

Steve, I don’t know how Gwinnett solicits public input, but here is how my county does it. They have set aside a small window of time for public input. To get on the agenda, you must go by central office IN PERSON and fill out a form ONE WEEK in advance of the meeting. No phone calls. No emails. No USPS mail. In person. On the night of the BOE meeting, they will call you up and you can give your spiel while the board members try their best to ignore you. After you have your say, they thank you and move onto the next person on the agenda. Very seldom have I seen any public input generate any discussion by the board.

The ONLY time I can remember anyone getting any satisfaction using the public input forum is when the President of the Athletic Association went before them. After his speech, about 100 parents stood up in unison and applauded.

Message delivered and received. The athletic association got what they wanted.

By steve

December 18, 2008 7:29 PM | Link to this

cat,

You (we) still have the ultimate power to vote them out if that’s what enough of us want. Your comments are a great example of why public inputs may be totally fruitless because you assume only the worst case scenario. I don’t see anything wrong with some classes having 35 students. In fact, in those situations, not putting that many students is wasteful. By having some larger classes, schools can have other smaller classes without having to hire extra teachers. Or teachers may have an extra planning period. In general, trying to legislate the class size is stupid - those decisions should be made case-by-case.

By jim d

December 18, 2008 7:40 PM | Link to this

Wreaks of Sycamore ES all over again.

I’m damn glad my kid has gotten out of this hell hole called GCPS.

By catlady

December 18, 2008 8:46 PM | Link to this

After 35 years of teaching, steve, I cannot foresee anything good coming from this. I have seen the worst case senario, over and over again, when politicians decide to “save” money by being “flexible” with state rules. Any of that stuff you believe, I got some prize stuff I want to sell you.

By Vicki

December 18, 2008 10:01 PM | Link to this

steve - Have you been in a classroom lately?

By chuck

December 19, 2008 12:37 AM | Link to this

Steve, I can’t believe by your comments that you have even been IN A SCHOOL in the past 10 years. The ONE THING that consistently works to bring up test scores is smaller class sizes. In middle school for instance the maximum class size is 28. It should be 25. The reason the legislature made it mandatory to open another class at 29 is that if you give an administrator ANY wiggle room, he will pack those kids in like sardines.

The legislature is going to find that out soon with their so-called ban on “social Promotion”. They left room in their for a “committee” to decide if they can be moved on. If that doesn’t work the principal just changes the grades and moves them anyway. We had about 30 kids who were socially promoted/placed to high school from our 8th grade last year. Some of them had failed all four academic classes and the CRCT. It’s a JOKE. If the legislature doesn’t know this, they are fools. If they do know it, they are hypocrits and liars.

AND, guess what. No Pass, No Play is a joke too. Those kids who are “placed” in the next grade are eligible to play sports even though they may have failed all of their classes.

By steve

December 19, 2008 5:46 AM | Link to this

Vicki & Chuck,

Your questions made me wonder if YOU have been to schools lately…

As someone pointed out before (not in this thread, I don’t think) research shows that class size won’t really make any difference UNLESS you reduce the number to something below 20. 28 and 25 - there is really no difference.

It is also fascinating that some people (Chuck, catlady, etc) seem to have no trust of other people. Not only such disposition is unproductive but it is also illogical. In today’s test-craze atmosphere, what are the administrators most concerned about? Test scores! If increasing class size will not get the higher test scores, why would they increase class size? You can say whatever you want to say about administrators, but they are also educators, and most of them are concerned about students.

By cj

December 19, 2008 10:33 AM | Link to this

From J. Alvin himself:

No doubt you are aware that this issue has raised some concerns on the part of our teachers, mainly as a result of a news article that shared some preliminary information that has not been a major focus of our conversations with the State to this point. TAC is an important voice among our teachers so I wanted to be sure you had the latest, most accurate information on this matter. The IE2 Partnership Contract with the Georgia Board of Education would allow us to provide our schools with flexibility from certain state laws and rules so that they can devote their attention and resources to the things that really matter in raising student achievement. According to the law, the contract is the vehicle by which a school district requests permission to exercise specified flexibility in exchange for demonstrated, increased accountability. The partnership contract has to meet all of the requirements of the state law (HB 1209) as well as the rules for implementing it that were adopted by the Georgia Board of Education. Drafting the contract, therefore, was driven almost exclusively by the demands of the law and the rule, and the heightened performance measures for which we would agree to be held accountable. In developing Gwinnett’s contract, the major work with the State focused on getting the accountability measures into a form the State Board could support. **The flexibility components were not discussed much because that part of the contract’s development is yet to come. Local schools will have a say in how flexibility will be implemented, taking into account the school staff’s preferences and ideas for best meeting their students’ needs. Flexibility, therefore, will be a topic of considerable input from teachers, parents, school leaders, and others after the contract is approved that grants us the permission we need first to implement the flexibility we feel will make us more effective.** As we move into that phase of our partnership contract, you will be hearing more information than we could share before now, and your involvement will be highly sought. For now, I ask for your trust and confidence that we are not interested in doing anything under the label of flexibility that would be detrimental to our students or our teachers. This organization has a long, distinguished record that is testament to how much it values teachers, and how its commitment to doing what is best for students has made us a successful school district. The IE2 Partnership Contract will help us be even more successful in the future. Otherwise, we would not be pursuing it.

Hmm, we’ve already been told how our class sizes and lunches will change next year. I don’t recall giving any input to our administration.

By Old School

December 19, 2008 10:40 AM | Link to this

Steve, consider this: when class size is increased, it is increased across the board. Granted there are some classes and teachers that could work well with larger numbers. For the past 35 years I have taught Industrial Arts and now Engineering Drawing. My CTAE colleagues are in shops that were designed and furnished by the State of Georgia for a maximum 18 students. That maximum has been increased to 28 with no increase in square footage and very limited equipment updating. We are talking about heavy shops including Metals, Construction, Automotive and the like. One instructor per shop with classes of 28 and shops filled with power equipment. It’s not a very safe situation.

Yet when class sizes are increased, they are increased across the board. Most policies are applied with that same broad brush. It just isn’t smart and for us in CTAE, it isn’t safe.

We were hired directly out of industry for our expertise in our fields. We are also held to the exact same standards as classically trained teachers and must jump through the same hoops. We are teaching reading and writing and are expected to incorporate math into our skills areas. The 3 Rs are naturally imbedded in our classes in a real world manner. Our students cannot become proficient unless they can read technical manuals, perform the related maths and respond in writing to clients. But in addition to this, we CTAE teachers must have our students journal each day and we must respond as a counselor would. That takes time away from keeping our shops running safely and preparing our students to move into the workplace.

There is so much more to our public schools than the 4 academics and sensible reform ought to realize that.

By jim d

December 19, 2008 10:41 AM | Link to this

S.O.P. in GCPS.

Alvin helps design a law

Alvin dreams up scheme to use the law to his advantage.

Alvin hand selects a few parents that will do his bidding.

Alvin then claims parental involvement

Everyone else buys into his scam and Napoalvin does as he damn well pleases, yet again, to the detrement of education in Gwinnett.

Folks, this is nothing new to those of us that have been watching him operate for the past ten years.

By steve

December 19, 2008 11:42 AM | Link to this

Old School,

Although I emphasize with you in your situation, you must also agree that it will be absurd to set the class size to 18 so that the CATE classes can be taught safely and effectively. I imagine class size number is somehow used to establish the number of teachers a school may have, and if you can’t increase some classes over the limit, the only way you can deal with all students will be to increase the class size across the board. Remove that limitation, maybe they can put 35 students in some of the classes so that the CATE classes can be offered to 18 students at a time.

By chuck

December 19, 2008 1:59 PM | Link to this

Steve,

I am a 20 year veteran teacher. I am in the classroom every day. My response was based on pure, unadulterated experience. Maybe 30 years ago when you were a kid, students were well behaved enough to throw all those warm bodies together, but today that is ABSOLUTELY NOT THE CASE.

Until the 28 student ceiling was MANDATED, they “allowed” administrators flexibility. They could apply for waivers to exceed that amount by up to 10%. Do you think I ever had a class size of 28 during that time? Nope. My classes were all over the limit of 28. The legislature knew that if they were to actually achieve reduced class sizes they HAD TO MANDATE it. That is the reality. Theory is great, but PRACTICE is more important.

As for CTAE classes, you have no idea what you are talking about. The limit of 18 per class is critical for SAFETY. Those classes are funded 18-1. Administrators use them as a place to park athletes who are failing too many classes to play, students who are waiting to get to 18 so they can drop out without parental permission, and behavior problems inhopes that a “hands on” class wil entice them to behave. There is no justification for loading up those classes OR loading up Academic classes to make those numbers work.

As for your asserton that “size doesn’t matter” is this little article:

Washington, D.C. - States across the nation, facing shrinking budgets, are struggling to find a way to invest billions into reducing class size. A new book by the Economic Policy Institute explains why this effort is an effective step in improving student achievement, especially in the face of new, tougher standards imposed by President Bush and Congress.

In The Class Size Debate, an updated edition, economist Alan Krueger of Princeton University argues that smaller classes improve academic performance and future job earnings for millions of students. Krueger presents research that shows, for example, how smaller class size often produces fewer disruptions and invites closer teacher monitoring, allowing students to learn better. He also critiques research done to dispute the effectiveness of smaller class size, revealing the flaws in those findings.

This is just the first couple of paragraphs. You can find the rest of the article her:

[http://www.epi.org/content.cfm/pressreleasesclass062102]

By Vicki

December 19, 2008 2:34 PM | Link to this

Steve, Sorry for the delay in responding to your question, but I have been in a 5th Grade classroom all day.

So to answer YOUR question, today.

You still didn’t answer my question.

By steve

December 19, 2008 3:48 PM | Link to this

Alan Krueger has his view, and people like Eric A. Hanuskek has an opposing view. I tend to think, in education, no single variable will constantly influence outcomes universally. Some larger classes with some skillful teachers will produce high achievement, and some small classes with ineffective teachers will not produce any positive effect. No one-size-fit-all policy is going to make any real difference.

By GCPS Parent

December 19, 2008 3:51 PM | Link to this

HB1209 does require “full discussion and public input” prior to a submission to the state board of education , neither of which were met.

As far as boardmembers knowing answers to questions on IE2 - not a one of them. I know, I have asked. They do what they do best - refer the question to someone at the district who also does not respond.

By Larry

December 19, 2008 4:21 PM | Link to this

Jimd, this is the second time you mentioned Alvin helped design the IE2 law, but it appears no one is paying attention to you. I’ve been waiting 24 Warsteiners (about 1 day) for someone to notice IE2 didn’t exist before April this year. The other two-plus years from which many posters feel excluded had nothing to do with any current proposal, but were negotiating with lawmakers about the thing even existing. Sigh.

Also, I about passed out laughing over the posts that claim our BoE can avoid public input. Obviously, you and I are the experts in this field, so I suggest we start a for (obscene) profit organization to teach folks how to do what we have done so well on countless occasions. The Black Marker Kid comes to mind…

You can keep most of the profits, since I am a man with simple, basic needs – like that new C300 I test drove last week.

By par

December 19, 2008 7:50 PM | Link to this

DID YOU KNOW?: The Gwinnett County Board of Education will gather at 7:30 a.m. Saturday (12-20-08) for a special-called meeting to vote on the Investing in Educational Excellence Partnership Contract school plans.” DID YOU KNOW?:
Mr. Wilbanks addressed the Gwinnett Chamber of Commerce in September of 2007 where he stated “There is absolutely no data that shows 24 or 22 students in a class make a hill of beans of difference.” continuing “Of course if I’m a teacher I’ll prefer marking 22 papers instead of 24.” (‘Wilbanks asks for backup in mandate fight’; AJC 9-20-07) Nice dig at the teachers he says are essential partners. I wonder when the Gwinnett Chamber will react….perhaps when people stop bringing their children to Gwinnett County to be educated. They need to ask Clayton County Chamber of Commerce how it’s looking down there.

Barbara Wilson, co-pres GCAE said, “While we can find no legal means of delaying the submission to the state BOE, we will be appealing it in light of the Gwinnett’s BOE failure to solicit that input prior to submission.” (Gwinnett Daily Post 12-19-08 “School Board to meet Saturday on education plan” Heather Darenberg) Here’s a law suit to consider….Gwinnett County BOE fraudulent receipt of funds based on purported parent involvement. Every parent in the county knows that “parent involvement” is a sham in Gwinnett. They do and say and document what is necessary to get the funding but when it comes down to actually involving parents, as we see here, it is really just smoke, mirrors and give us the money. Let’s talk ‘spirit of the law’ I believe a case could be made. One last consideration: Louise Radloff (incumbent) vs. Ravindra Kumar was a very close board seat race in November. This EI2 issue as far as I recall did not come up….timing is everything. Had EI2 been on the table I can only imagine it might have turned out differently….ya think?

By gwinnett educator

December 19, 2008 8:21 PM | Link to this

whoa!!

By GCPS Parent

December 19, 2008 8:38 PM | Link to this

Jim D & Anyone-

One question I can’t quite figure out. Both this 5 year IE2 contract and the NCLB deadline intersect in 2014..HB1209 requires that all BOE’s opt in or out of IE2 by 2013. What do you think is the thread that is running through all of them ? Is it funding ? What do you think. I know there is a connection, but just not sure what it would be. What are your thoughts?

By par

December 19, 2008 10:44 PM | Link to this

GCPS Parent, gwinnett educator, et al; Money is EVERYTHING…..what do you think is the common thread? do you think that Gwinnett County Board of Commissioners or the Gwinnett County Chamber of Commerce wants to advertise “Gwinnett County Has Biggest Class Sizes”….”bring your family here?” I don’t think that the chamber knows who they are dealing with…..really. Alvin, in true form, can’t be good for business…..

By GCPS Parent

December 20, 2008 1:13 AM | Link to this

Par, Tell me more. Money in what way ? What funding stream do I need to look into ? Is it money for the schools, or something different. There is a pot of gold in HB1209 which no one has yet to clarify. It talks about additional sources of funds for systems that apply to IE2. Read Hb1209 if you haven’t already and let me know what you think. I will do research in this area, but I just need a bone to go on.

By jim d

December 20, 2008 3:15 AM | Link to this

GCPS Parent,

I’m afraid the connection is much more sinister than just money. I look for our educational system to become totally federally owned and operated within 5 years.

Be afraid—-be very afraid.

By jim d

December 20, 2008 3:19 AM | Link to this

Larry,

Thanks for the chuckle. Do you honestly think people would pay to learn how to think?

By gwinnett educator

December 20, 2008 6:17 AM | Link to this

par, I appreciate the info and I know that it is money. Im also glad to read other info so that I can go and do more research.

This is only my 2nd yr teaching in Gwinnett County. Before, I spent my time researching and trying to figure out what was really going on in Dekalb County (spent 9.5 yrs teaching there).

par, when I read your post, I immediately called a friend of mine who is a GCPS parent and substitute that truly believes in being informed. To say she was flabbergasted/upset over this 730 meeting is putting it lightly. I didnt even think of it this way until she said it..people have begun their XMAS BREAK! Parents and teachers are traveling, etc and many are not thinking about what is going on.

Now, off to read up on HB1209

By jim d

December 20, 2008 7:15 AM | Link to this

Flexibility

Under O.G.C.A. § 20-2-280 and SBOE Rule 160-5-1-.33, the Gwinnett County Public SchoolDistrict is seeking state flexibility for all its schools from the following state statutes and/or rules in exchange for greater accountability (see measures below) over the life of a five-year contract between the Gwinnett Board of Education and the Georgia State Board of Education.

• Flexibility with regards to Class-size and Reporting requirements (O.G.C.A. § 20-2-182)

• Flexibility with regards to Expenditure Controls (O.G.C.A § 20-2-171)

• Flexibility with regards to QBE Financing (O.G.C.A § 20-2-160)

• Flexibility with regards to Categorical Allotment requirements (Article 6 of Chapter 2 of Title 20)

• Flexibility with regards to Salary Schedule requirements (O.G.C.A § 20-2-212)

• Flexibility with regards to Certification requirements (O.G.C.A § 20-2-200)

• Flexibility with regards to Employment, Conditions of Employment as it relates to Duty Free Lunch (O.G.C.A. § 20-2-218)

• Flexibility with regards to School Attendance, Compulsory Attendance as it relates to the attendance protocol (O.G.C.A § 20-2-690.2)

• Flexibility with regards to ELL Program requirements (O.G.C.A § 20-2-156)

• Flexibility with regards to Educational Programs (O.G.C.A § 20-2-152)

• Flexibility with regards to Organization of Schools; Middle School Programs; Schedule (O.G.C.A § 20-2-290)

• Flexibility with regards to competencies and Core Curriculum (O.G.C.A § 20-2-142 and SBOE Rule 160-4-2-.48) and achieving.

Damn,

Appears they are asking to be allowed to determine what constitutes a lawful absence. As a parent I would find this most disturbing. Particullarly since the school system has a reputation for using DFACS to harrass parents that have the audacity to speak out against all the BS.

You Go Napoalvin! You’ll have your little monarchy yet!

By jim d

December 20, 2008 7:58 AM | Link to this

It also appears teachers will join the ranks of surf’s under Napoalvins reign.

let me just point out a couple of things here.

1: the county already has the authority to pay teachers more, the only possible reason for wanting Flexibility with regards to Salary Schedule requirements would be to cut them.

2: As for Flexibility with regards to Employment, Conditions of Employment as it relates to Duty Free Lunch (O.G.C.A. § 20-2-218) I believe most teachers are smart enough to figure that one out all by themselves.

OK, all you teachers in Gwinnett get ready to get the love lube out.

By gwinnett educator

December 20, 2008 8:45 AM | Link to this

jim d..I never understood why Gwinnett pays so much LESS than Dekalb and most definitely APS. APS pays well over 6k more than Gwinnett (what I would be making).

I will not comment on that duty free lunch mess. Just know that the way our principal explained it during a committee meeting made me do nothing but give a major EYE ROLL.

By bearcasey

December 20, 2008 10:10 AM | Link to this

If teachers and parents are not involved in this process from the beginning, I would be very, very scared.

By jim d

December 20, 2008 6:33 PM | Link to this

Gwinnett Ed,

Because they can.

Gwinnett only became a majority minority system a couple of years ago.

By elected super

December 20, 2008 6:56 PM | Link to this

Legislation to bring back elected superintendents would stop Alvin doing things his way. It would also help out a lot of other school districts in similar messes.

By Rob Smith

December 20, 2008 11:28 PM | Link to this

If GCPS and Wilbanks and Co., is seeking Flexibility in regards to Employment ! Why doesn’t he start at Headquarters ? Nyc’s Mayor Bloomberg sits in a Cubicle as all his top administrators do. Why doesn’t Mr. Wilbanks and his Deputy Superintendants sit in an Open Office Configuration, as they do ? Think how this will help for the exchange of ideas ! The ISC is bigger then NYC’s City Hall how about selling the building or sharing it with a GCPS School ? During the Board Meeting that was attented by over 650 + people, what was playing on GCPS’s 20+ Flat Screen TV’s thorough out the Building, not the Board Meeting, only snow ? The ISC main restroom is larger then most at Turner Field do they have one Waterless Urinal, No… Take a look at the ISC Parking Lot 2/3 of the Parking Spaces go unused. Why don’t you stop paying for that space ? Perhaps they could construct a Chick-Fil-A or a Bank on that Acerage and GCPS could save some money. That would show both creativity and flexibility on your part ! Mr. Wilbanks before you start changing the conditions of employment at the School Level how about taking a closer look at your own office and changing them there first !

By jim d

December 22, 2008 2:09 AM | Link to this

Larry,

“notice IE2 didn’t exist before April this year”

So what do you make of this?

“Superintendent J. Alvin Wilbanks said the district has been working on this for three years”

By GCPS Parent

December 22, 2008 5:41 PM | Link to this

Jim D -

Alvin Wilbanks sat on the committee when the original goal was to reform the QBE formula. This is the only part of the committee work that survived - the flex portion. Brooks Coleman helped draft this into law, and I understand Wilbanks was very clear with the legislators what he wanted to see happen. But now, that did not really get back to GCPS public until the first board meeting in October, and then it was very muddled. Documents up on the 3 PM board meeting website, pulled down from the 3 PM board meeting website. this was as clear as mud to the public.

By Elizabeth

December 24, 2008 3:26 PM | Link to this

Okay, let’s sum it up. First , class size. Youy think it doesn’t make a difference? When I started teaching 27 years ago, you could have 35 kids in a class because kids wer bette behaved. Now, that’s impossible. In addition— if yo have a 50 minute cl,a*, and the sinstructin takes 20 minutes and the work based on that lesson taskes the remainder of that time, divide 35 by 40. You have less than a minute per student to help each student individually. Add more students and the time for each decreases. While yo are helping you are also trying to manage those who do not wish to learn or work. These numbers have increased from 1 or 2 to at least 9 or 10 per class. More students in a class, less time for the individual instruction for each child that parents and counsleors and special education teachers demand these days..

Salary changes? Does that mean that areas with shortages get more money and I, who teach Language Arts and grade 120 essays each week plus daily journals, get less money? Fine. Then don’t ask the ones making less to be team leaders, club sponsors, SST chairpersons, etc. Let the ones making more money do the extra because I will not.

No duty free luch? That, folks, is a state law. Try changing that one and see how many teachers the legislature willhear from. Do you think that will add instruction time? Not for me. Why is it that every other worker in this state is mandated to have a 30 minute lunch period but it is okay to take that away from teachers? A tired, stressed teacher who cannot eat lunch and have a break will not be a teacher who is a better instructor. Just the opposite.

Finally, I would suggest that Gwinnett look hard at Clayton County. SACS does not appreciate a school board and superintendent who do not follow SACs standards.

By catlady

December 25, 2008 12:57 PM | Link to this

It would be wonderful to have thirty minutes scheduled for lunch. On paper we have 25, but we are actually free less than 20. Could we get help to get our full time? Or get paid for extended day?